Category Archives: Liberty

1640s, as a theological term (in reference to “covenants” between God and man), from French fédéral, an adjective formed from Latin foedus (genitive foederis) “covenant, league, treaty, alliance,” from PIE *bhoid-es-, suffixed form of root *bheidh- “to trust, confide, persuade.”

Secular meaning “pertaining to a covenant or treaty” (1650s) led to political sense of “formed by agreement among independent states” (1707), from use of the word in federal union “union based on a treaty” (popularized during formation of U.S.A. 1776-1787) and like phrases. Also from this period in U.S. history comes the sense “favoring the central government” (1788) and the especial use of the word (as opposed to confederate) to mean a state in which the federal authority is independent of the component parts within its legitimate sphere of action. Used from 1861 in reference to the Northern forces in the American Civil War.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said on Saturday that she had been asked to leave a Virginia restaurant the night before because she worked for U.S. President Donald Trump.

“Last night I was told by the owner of Red Hen in Lexington, VA to leave because I work for @POTUS and I politely left,” Sanders said on the official Press Secretary Twitter account.

On Saturday, the owner of the Red Hen confirmed the incident and said she stood by her decision to refuse service to Sanders, the Washington Post reported.

I 100% support this action by the owner of a private establishment.

She should be free to enter into contract, or not, with anyone she chooses. Be they men, white, republicans or Vikings fans. It is her business with her money and she should be able to decide who she serves.

Share this:

The horrors we witnessed in Parkland took place a week ago this afternoon. For many of us, the tragedy is still fresh and frontal. For a few, those horrors will never end; that day in mid-February 2018 will define their existence.

I can’t imagine. And, we’ve seen it before – we’ll see it again. All of us, myself included, after the kids are in bed, are left with this question:

What do we do? What CAN we do?

In the coming days I’m gonna explore my thoughts and my feelings. I’m gonna think about what we can do, what I can do; if anything.

I’ve seen what seems like a never ending barrage of thoughts, and arguments, debate and anger. Rage. Despair.

And blame.

Which brings me to my point. As I, we, explore feelings and define the problems looking for solutions – I want to do so from a position of mutual acknowledgement. Namely that I love my kids, and yours, in the same manner that love your kids, and mine.

Period.

It’s likely, that as intelligent people with different histories and experience, we are going to arrive at separate conclusions after being exposed to the same body of facts. And that, THAT, has to be okay. It cannot be that those who shout loudest, most often and without regard to civility are allowed to carry the day. Neither can we allow the debate to devolve into that place where we question each other’s motives.

I don’t doubt the liberla’s intentions – they mean well. Who doesn’t want medical care for the child, income for the poor, safe haven for the oppressed, equality for the marginalized or parity for all?

The problem isn’t the end, its the means. It’s always been about the means.

Share this:

You’ll have to forgive me if I don’t approve of your solution to government incompetence is to give more power to the government to wreck my life:

The gunman who slaughtered 26 people at a Texas church was able to buy weapons because the Air Force failed to report his domestic violence conviction to the federal database that is used to conduct background checks on would-be gun purchasers, authorities said Monday.

Federal officials said the Air Force didn’t submit Devin Patrick Kelley’s criminal history even though it was required to do so by Pentagon rules.

Kelley, 26, was found guilty of assault in an Air Force court-martial in 2012 for abusing his wife and her child and was given 12 months’ confinement followed by a bad-conduct discharge in 2014. That same year, authorities said, he bought the first of four weapons.

Under Pentagon rules, information about convictions of military personnel for crimes like assault should be submitted to the FBI’s Criminal Justice Investigation Services Division.

Because you suck at what you do you want me to give you more power to suck at what you do? I think I’ll pass on enabling your suckiness.

Share this:

We saw conflict this weekend in Charlottesville. We saw a group of American citizens, people living in 2017, marching for white pride, under a Nazi flag, espousing repugnant and wicked world views. Views totally incompatible with mainstream American values. Views inconsistent with the views held during the founding of this nation.

We’ve rejected this side of ourselves since we were we.

Nazis, neo-Nazis, white nationalists and white supremacists are among the worst examples of us.

We, I, despise the departure of Individual Liberty these people preach.

No one I know agrees with the motives of those hate groups.

2. Tribes

Consider rivalries.

Consider the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Cleveland Browns.

Say the Browns announced that they were gonna assemble on Saturday and have a Brown’s parade. And then the Steelers decided that they were gonna show up, and then engage those Browns fans.

Violence ensues.

Who is to blame?

3. Free Speech

We have a rich history of protected speech in America. We rightly should rejoice in this. However, not all speech is protected. Some speech incites violence and should be denied.

We need to admit that.

If the Nazi’s request to assemble is inciting violence, deny it and arrest them if they gather. Or

Or.

Or have the balls to admit that they DO have the right to assemble and protect their rights to do so.

One. Or. The other.

4. Right to Assemble

Motives aside, if one group has been given the right to assemble, and another group, motives aside, seeks to deny or infringe on that right, the moral argument is mute.

Speech has been determined to be protected.

Share this:

So, there’s an art contest where students submit their work to Congress. Among the entrees, there are finalists and those finalists get their work displayed. This year, one of those finalists depicts the Statue of Liberty as a Muslim woman wearing a hijab.

I like it.

I like the actual art AND I like the message. I like the idea that people of all walks are able to look at Lady Liberty and see themselves reflected. Apparently, not all people are as impressed as I am:

A Democratic congressman is taking heat from Sarah Palin and other conservatives for a painting hanging in his California district office that depicts the Statue of Liberty as a Muslim woman.

We the People Rising, a conservative-leaning activist group, was among the first to object to the painting in Rep. Lou Correa’s district office in Santa Ana, Calif., arguing it violates the separation of church and state.

And more; from a video posted on We the People Rising’s website:

“You guys have a picture out in front of your office with the Statue of Liberty wearing a hijab, which I find reprehensible and disrespectful,” one of the members tells a staffer in the first video. “I would like to request that you remove it.”

Again, I don’t understand the reprehensible and disrespectful nature of the painting. It’s not mocking the Lady, it doesn’t depict her in a negative light. All it does is show what Liberty might look like if she were standing in another part of the world.

Kinda like depicting Jesus as a white guy standing in America rather than the brown guy he really was.

And speaking of religion, how is the painting supposed to violate the separation of church and state? And since when have conservatives minded such violations; though it is delicious to see such an argument used against a democrat.

As I’ve explained over and over – the concept of such separation between the church and the state does not mean that there can be no explicit religion in the state, only that the leader of state cannot be te same leader of the church. Or, that there be no official nation religion supported by the state.

If congress wants to open with a prayer to Allah, they may. The idea that a congressman can’t have a religious symbol in his office is insane; no one makes a fuss, or should make such fuss, when a congressman wears a cross chain, or has the Bible in his shelf or other such outward symbols.

As far as I’m concerned, the more Muslim girls that yearn from America’s Liberty the better this world will be!